Okay so for this weakening question, I immediately thought: Cause and effect relationship.

Cause: program making higher moraleEffect: less dropouts

So - I chose (D) thinking that it was an alternative explanation of why they stayed in school; if there is an office helping them get jobs after graduating, maybe this is why there is a lower drop out rate and not the program!

BUT apparently the answer is (A), why I see does the same thing by giving them a reason not to drop out.

My issue here is that (A) and (D) both seem to be alternatives to why kids arent dropping out. I've read some forums about the answers choices and still dont see why A is right and D is wrong.

Point: Program instituted two years ago to improve the morale of high school students has begun to take effect to reduce dropouts.Support: Last year, the city’s high school dropout rate was significantly lower than the previous year’s rate.Flaw: Correlation does not prove causation. The argument attributes the lower dropout rate to the program. Maybe some other outside factor contributed to the decrease in the dropout rate.

A-Exactly what we are looking for. Recession= harder to get jobs= perhaps may explain why students stayed in school. Therefore, A is correct.B-Has no direct impact on the reasoning.C-We don’t care about the number of students. Also tough to see how it weakens the argument.D-Very tricky and trap answer choice. The choice gives a reason why students may have wanted to stay in school but we are unsure if this was a part of the program. If it was a part of the program then it actually strengthens the question! Therefore, it is wrong. E-Doesn’t impact the conclusion. Even strengthens the argument.

D) is wrong because those who drop out of high school before graduating are still able to find work; no need to have placement offices! Thus, D wouldn't really be an alternative explanation. A) on the other hand is correct because, like you stated, provides an alternative explanation for the effect of less dropouts ie) recession, so harder to find employment.

Also, there's no indication that the placement offices are any good - we would have to assume that they are in fact effective in helping students find employment; if it is just as easy to find a job without graduating, then what good is the placement program?

flash21 wrote:Okay so for this weakening question, I immediately thought: Cause and effect relationship.

Cause: program making higher moraleEffect: less dropouts

So - I chose (D) thinking that it was an alternative explanation of why they stayed in school; if there is an office helping them get jobs after graduating, maybe this is why there is a lower drop out rate and not the program!

BUT apparently the answer is (A), why I see does the same thing by giving them a reason not to drop out.

My issue here is that (A) and (D) both seem to be alternatives to why kids arent dropping out. I've read some forums about the answers choices and still dont see why A is right and D is wrong.

THANKS!

Basically, D is not very satisfactory at all, although i would disagree with the both of the above posters' rationales for why

The CAUSE of the dropouts not only is that students feel they are not succeeding but ALSO that, we can infer, there is an alternative to school a la work. However with D, the program does not change the fact that students do not feel they are succeeding, regardless of whether or not it will serve to acquire them jobs upon graduation. If i am failing a class and someone tells me i can still get a job in the future, does that make me feel any less like i'm failing a class? No. Thus, with D, and in absence of A, students are still going to drop out for jobs. Even if the question posed simply said "students who are feeling unsuccessful drop out of school," then neither A nor D would be correct, because D simply does not change the current feelings of the students.

A however, eliminates one of the two conditions that are together necessary for a person to dropout (unsuccessful and alternative available).

I hope this makes sense; i haven't read any prepbooks or lsat stuff on LR so i don't know the terms for stuff, but this is how i would reason it and it seems to make sense to me.